IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 28, NO.

I , JANUARY 1992

Numerical Determination of Hysteresis Parameters

the Modeling of Magnetic Properties Using the
Theory of Ferromagnetic Hysteresis
David C. Jiles, Senior Member, IEEE, J . B. Thoelke. and M. K. Devine

Abstract-This paper describes how the various model pa- where n is the number density of pinning sites,
rameters needed to describe hysteresis on the basis of the Jiles- the average pinning energy of the sites for 180" domain
Atherton theory can be calculated from experimental measure-
walls, and m is the magnetic moment of a typical domain.
ments of the coercivity, remanence, saturation magnetization,
initial anhysteretic susceptibility, initial normal susceptibility, If the coefficient n ( E , ) / 2 m on the right-hand side is ex-
and the maximum differential susceptibility. The determination pressed in terms of a single parameter k by the equation
of hysteresis parameters based on this limited set of magnetic
properties is of the most practical use since these are the prop-
erties of magnetic materials that are most likely to be available.

this leads to
INTRODUCTION

I N previous papers, the problem of modeling ferro-

magnetic hysteresis has been discussed [ l ] , [ 2 ] , and
Epm(Mm) = pok S,
M,"
d~im (3)

from a consideration of the underlying mechanism of do- where k is now in units of A m-I. The hysteresis equa-
main wall motion, two differential equations have been tion for irreversible changes in magnetization can be de-
derived which represent the irreversible differential sus- rived from (3), and this can be shown to be [ 3 ]
ceptibility and the reversible differential susceptibility [ 3 ] .
The solution of these differential equations, when com- (4)
bined with an appropriate choice of function for the an-
hysteretic magnetization, leads to a normal sigmoid- where He is the effective field, defined as
shaped hysteresis curve. This paper derives the equations
in the inversion algorithm which are used for determining He = H + aM (5)
the model parameters from experimental data. and 6 is a directional parameter having the value + 1 for
d H / d t > 0 and - 1 for d H / d t < 0. Equation (4) above
EQUATION OF HYSTERESIS may be rearranged, providing k # 0 and k6 - a ( M a n -
The previous development of the equations is first sum- Mi,,) # 0 , to give the equation for the differenfal irre-
marized with k redefined in units of A * m-' instead of versible susceptibility:
tesla. This leads to a more useful result because for very dMi, - Man - Mi,
soft magnetic materials, k then becomes equal to the coer- (6)
dH k6 - a ( M a n - Mi,,)'
civity H,, which is measured in A m-I. -
REVERSIBLE DIFFERENTIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY
IRREVERSIBLE DIFFERENTIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY
The component of reversible magnetization reduces the
The energy lost to pinning is expressed as a function of
difference between tne prevailing irreversible magnetiza-
the irreversible change in magnetization M i , [3] by the
tion Mi, and the anhysteretic magnetization Man at the
equation
given field strength. This can be expressed as
Mrev = dMan - Mi,) (7)
since the amount of bending of the domain walls is de-
pendent on the difference between the anhysteretic mag-
Manuscript received November 19, 1990; revised August 28, 1991. This netization and the irreversible magnetization M I , [ 3 ] .
work was performed for the U.S. Department of Energy by Iowa State
University under Contract W-7405-ENG-82.
Consequently,
The authors are with the Ames Laboratory, Iowa State University, Ames,
1A 5OO11. (8)
IEEE Log Number 9 104973. dH

001 8-9464/92$03.00 0 1992 IEEE

28 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 28, NO. I, JANUARY 1992

~~

TOTALDIFFERENTIAL
SUSCEPTIBILITY
Summation of the reversible and irreversible compo- -- M/M8

nents of the differential susceptibility leads to the total

a
k
Ms
-- 1.7 MA/.
1000 A h
500 A h
1.0

differential susceptibility d M / d H : alpha

c - .OOl
.l

The exact form of this equation is slightly different from

that used in the earlier paper [3] because of the altered
forms of (6) and (7) which allow complete separation of
the reversible and irreversible contributions to the differ-
ential susceptibility at any point on the hysteresis curve.
(Ultimately, this only has the effect of changing the value
of c, the form of the hysteresis curves remaining identi-
cal.)
I

-10
: : ! : I
SOLUTIONS OF THE HYSTERESIS EQUATIONS
It has been found most convenient from the viewpoint
of numerical solutions for hysteresis modeling to first ’

solve (6) for the irreversible component of magnetization

-- 1307
and then add the reversible component by solving (7). It
--
Xsn
Xin 61.6
should be noted that some unphysical solutions to (6) can m
--
10 k A h
IC 1.546 MA/n
be obtained when the magnetic field is reduced from the XI 14.3
extremity of the loop (i.e., the loop tip) when the mag- I&
Xr -- .SO3 Iu/n
852.4
netization Mi, is below the anhysteretic Manin the first
quadrant or above the anhysteretic in the third quadrant.
-1.0 nC
Xc - 467 AI.
1207.9

In this case, direct solution of (6) leads to a negative dif-
ferential susceptibility as the fiela is reduced. In fact, un-
der these conditions, the domain walls actually remain
pinned on the defect sites, and so dMi,/dH = 0 . How-
ever, at this stage, the reversible changes in magnetiza-
tion are still operative, so that a bulged domain wall will
relax as the field is reduced. This means that as the field
is reduced from the loop tip, until the magnetization
crosses the anhysteretic, the change in magnetization is
almost reversible, and therefore on the basis of the model,
d M / d H = dM,,/dH in this region.
EXAMPLE SOLUTIONS OF THE MODELEQUATIONS
Some example solutions of the model equations of hys-
teresis are shown in Figs. 1,2, 3, and 4 for various values
of the hysteresis parameters. These results give some in-
dication of the range of hysteresis loops which can be ob-
tained from solving the hysteresis equations. It can be seen
that the model is not just restricted to soft magnetic ma-
terials, but also can be used for hard magnetic materials.
For example, in Fig. 4, the coercivity is 0.41 x lo6 A/m
(5.125 kOe).
PARAMETER EXTRACTION FROM EXPERIMENTAL DATA
Until now, it has not been clear how to calculate the
model parameters a, CY, k, and c from a set of experimen-
tal data in the form of a hysteresis loop. This is a difficult
procedure since it is not immediately clear which “fixed
reference points’’ on a measured hysteresis curve should
be used to calculate the parameters. Furthermore, the im-
Fig. 1. Theoretical hysteresis loop obtained from solution of the model
equations with M, = 1.7 X IO6 A . m-’,a = 1000 A . m - ’ , k = 500
A m - ’ , a = 0.001. c = 0.1.
plicit nature of the hysteresis equations makes the prob-
lem intractable for an injudicious choice of these fixed
points. It has been found that the simplest solution to the
problem is obtained by using the initial normal suscepti-
bility x ,!,, the initial anhysteretic susceptibility x in, the
coercivity H,,the differential susceptibility at the coer-
cive point x he,the remanence M,,the differential suscep-
tibility at remanence xk, and the coordinates H,, M , of
a loop tip, together with the differential susceptibility of
the initial magnetization curve at the loop tip x;. From
these measured magnetic properties, the parameters gov-
erning the hysteresis equations can be calculated. In many
cases, this calculation will be sufficient for modeling pur-
poses; in other cases, it can be used as a first approxi-
mation forming a basis for subsequent refinement.
SATURATION MAGNETIZATION M,
The easiest parameter to obtain is the saturation mag-
netization M,.This is often known for a particular mate-
rial, and so can be obtained from data sheets or other ref-
erences. It can also be measured as closely as desired by
subjecting the material to a field of arbitrarily high
strength, and then either measuring the flux density B with
a coil or the magnetization M with a vibrating sample
magnetometer, and then calculating M , from these mea-
surements.
 ~

JILES er al.: HYSTERESIS PARAMETERS FOR MODELING MAGNETIC PROPERTIES 29

Ma -- 1 . 7 MA/m 1.0 -
M/MS
Ma -- 1.7 MA/n 1.0
a
k -- 1000 A/n
2000 A/n
a
k -- io00 A/n
2000 A h
alpha
c - .OOl
.l
alpha
c - .0017
.l

-10
1 : : : :

10 -10 ---t

Xan
Xln
k h
--
--
1307
57.7
10 kA/m
1 Xan
Xin
m -
-
= 15454
57.7
10 kA/m

-
I(n
Xm
IC
Xr
--
--
1.507 MA/n
25.1
. 9 7 a IWIB
337
L la-
m -
I C -
x r -
--
1 . S 3 1 MA/.
19.4
1 . 1 9 1 cU/a
191.3
-1.0 nc
xc - 1644 A/n
745
-1.0 He
xc
1734 A/m
1604.9

Fig. 2 . Theoretical hysteresis loop obtained from solution of the model Fig. 3 . Theoretical hysteresis loop obtained from solution of the model
equations with M , = 1.7 X lo6 A . m-I, a = 1000 A . m-', k = 2000 equations with M , = 1.7 X lo6 A . m - ' , a = 1000 A . m-I, k = 2000
A . m-I, (Y = 0.001, c = 0.1. A . m-',CY = 0.0017, c = 0.1.

DETERMINATION OF THE PARAMETER c WHICH zation, based on modified Langevin function, has been
REPRESENTS REVERSIBLE WALLMOTION used, giving the equation
The reversible component of magnetization due to re-
versible wall bending and reversible translation is deter-
mined in the model by the coefficient c. This can be cal-
culated from the ratio of the initial normal susceptibility
Since M = 0 at the origin, this leads to the following
x,', = ( d M / d H ) H = O , M =toOthe initial anhysteretic suscep- expression for x {, on substituting (1 1) into (10):
tibility xLn = (dMan/dH)H=o,M=o. The actual relation-
ship depends on the method of numerical solution used
because the equations are implicit in M , and although c
= (3a - aM,/M,)x,!,, the method which is used here x! =
(1 - C) [coth E) i]-

assumes that the anhysteretic Manwhich is effective at any

given point on the M , H plane depends only on the pre- k6 - CY [coth ):( i]
-
vailing values of M and H .
From (9) above, consider the situation at the origin of
the initial magnetization curve. Here, Mi, = 0, and since
at the very origin the small incrementai magnetization
- [cosech? E) + $1 (12)

changes must be totally reversible, we have dM,,/dH = and taking the limit as H + 0 of coth ( H / a ) - ( a / H ) ,
0. Therefore, from (9), we arrive at

lim [coth
H-0
F) (i)] - = lim
H-O
/4 +
H 3U
+ - * * - H

In the case of completely isotropic materials, in which

the magnetization has essentially no preferred direction,
a phenomenological model of the anhysteretic magneti-
30 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 28, NO. 1, JANUARY 1992

be remembered that this choice of Man is very specific,

Ma -- 1.2 nA/m 1.0
WMa
- and that other functions for Manexist for particular cir-
a
- 120000 A h cumstances.
--
k SO0000 A/n
alpha .S From the anhysteretic function given in (1 l), it is easily
c .os
shown that the anhysteretic susceptibility at the origin is
given by

and so

a= 3(++ .).
H LA/nl 3 Xan
c : : : : I

-1500
This equation can then be used as a constraint on the
1500
model parameters a and a,although a further condition is
needed to determine the values of these parameters.

DETERMINATION OF THE PARAMETER k WHICH

DETERMINES THE HYSTERESIS Loss
Xan -- -5
The coercivity is determined by the amount of pinning,
Xin
- .I and hence by the parameter k. For very soft magnetic ma-
---
M 1500 kA/D
Cc 1.067 M A h terials, it is found that k = H,, provided k is defined in
.l

--
XI
W 1.014 M A h
units of A m-' as given above. For this reason, the
xr .2 definition of the pinning parameter in units of A * m-' is
-1.0 1 Hc
Xc - 412178 A/.
25.2 preferred since the pinning force acts like a field opposing
the prevailing magnetic field H. The general relationship
Fig. 4. Theoretical hysteresis loops obtained from solution of the model between k and H, can be expressed most simply if the
equations with M, = 1.2 X lo6 A . m - ' , a = 120 X lo3 A . m - ' , k = differential susceptibility at the coercive point x;l, is
500 x lo3 A . m - ' , 01 = 0.5, c = 0.05.
known.
Again, we return to (9), and now consider the situation
so that at the coercive point. Let x;l, = x,',,~~ denote the differ-
ential susceptibility at the coercive point, which in the
dM model is always the maximum value of differential sus-
x[,, = lim -
ceptibility observed around the hysteresis loop.
H+O dH

= o + - CdMan
dH *

And since M = 0 at the origin of the magnetization curve,

at the position coercive point 6 - 1 , H = H,, M = 0 , and

This then gives rearranging the equation in terms of k leads to

which is a direct relationship between c and the initial

susceptibility. + a(Man(Hc) - Mirr). (22)
Explicit equations for M i , and d M i , / d H at the coercive
RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN
a a AND
point can be obtained in terms of M a n ( H c ) ,x,!,,,,, and
The anhysteretic susceptibility itself gives a relation- dMan(Hc>/ d H since it has already been given [3] that
ship between the model parameters a and a. This rela-
tionship, of course, depends on the form of the function M = ME, + Mi,, (23)
chosen to model the anhysteretic magnetization curve. The
modified Langevin function has been used successfully to and since M,, = c(Man- M i r r ) ,it follows that
model the anhysteretic magnetization, although it should M = CM,, + (1 - C)MIrr (24)
JILES er al.: HYSTERESIS PARAMETERS FOR MODELING MAGNETIC PROPERTIES 31

and rearranging gives

1
MI, = -( M -
1-c
Since M = 0 at the coercive point, (25) yields

while differentiating (25) with respect to H and consid-

ering the values at the coercive point gives
dMi,(Hc) -
--
dH
( ) 1
1 - c
Xmax -
(I - c )
-
c dMan(Hc)
~

dH .
Man(Mr) - Mr
(27) (L)
I - c x' = - ( 1 - c ) k - a ( M a n ( M r )- M,)
Substituting these expressions into (22) gives the fol-
lowing equation for k :
G =
1
+ (1- - '3 dMan (Mi-1
dH '
(34)

and rearranging this equation leads to

1
dMan (Mr1

2nd consequently, (Mr - Man (Mr 1). (35)

This equation can then be used to give an explicit
expression for M,, which is

(29)
which can be used to calculate k provided all of the other
parameters are known.
DETERMINATION OF a A N D a
The remanence point Mr is dependent on a and other
parameters. If the other parameters a , k , and c are known,
the remanence can be used to calculate C Y . However, in
this case, it has not been possible to obtain an explicit
expression for a.
Using the remanence M , and the differential suscepti-
:,
bility at remanence x the parameter a can be determined
if the other parameters are already known. Starting from
(9), with 6 = - 1, H = 0, and M = M,,
and since M , = M,, + Mirrand M,, = c(M,, - M i r r ) ,it
can be shown that, at remanence,
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HYSTERESIS PARAMETERS
AT THE LOOPTIP
Finally, in calculating a and a , it has been found useful
to include some redundancy by incorporating the coordi-
nates of the loop tip M,, H , and the slope of the initial
magnetization curve at the loop tip xk.
We start again from (9) and consider the differential
susceptibility along the initial magnetization curve at the
loop tip with 6 = 1. If the loop tip is sufficiently close to
saturation, then the differential susceptibility of the initial
magnetization curve at the loop tip will approach the dif-
ferential susceptibility of the anhysteretic d M / d H =
dMan( H , ) / d H . This can be used as an approximation to
obtain an equation relating the hysteresis parameters.
Using the general result Mi, = ( M - c M a n ) / ( l - c ) , it
is easily seen that the above approximation also implies
that dM,,/dH = d M / d H = d M a n ( H c ) / d H .In addition,
MI,, = M , under these conditions.
Replacing Mi,, with M , leads to
32 IEEE T R A N S A C T I O N S O N M A G N E T I C S , VOL. 28, N O . 1, J A N U A R Y 1992

These approximations also allow the second term on TABLE I

HYSTERESISPARAMETERS USEDTO GENERATE THE
the right-hand side of (37) to be eliminated: HYSTERESIS CURVES SHOWN IN FIGS.1 and 2,
RESPECTIVELY

and rearranging this leads to M,(A . m-I) 1.7 x lo6 1.7 x lo6
a (A . m-I) 1000 1000
k (A . m-I) 500 2000
a 1.0 x 1.0 x 1 0 - ~
and hence, c 0.1 0.1

TABLE I1
In principle, the incorporation of this equation in the pa- MAGNETIC PROPERTIES INCLUDINGVARIOUS
SUSCEPTIBILITIES, COERCIVITY, AND REMANENCE
rameter caiculation algorithm is not entirely necessary, OBTAINED FROM THE HYSTERESIS CURVES IN FIGS. 1
but it has been found that numerical solutions show faster and 2, RESPECTIVELY
convergence when this condition is included, and there-
A B
fore it is a useful practical addition to the previous equa-
tions for determining the hysteresis parameters. Xi” 1307 1307
X ;” 57 57
H, (kA . m-I) 10 10
PROCEDURE PARAMETERS
FOR CALCULATING M , (kA . m-’) 1546 1507
Since some of the equations needed for determining the XL 14.3 25.1
parameters can only be expressed implicitly in terms of M , (kA * m-’) 503 978
x’M, 852 337
these and other parameters, a numerical method has been H, (A . m-I) 467 1644
devised for calculating the values by using successive it- x’H, 1208 745
eration. The reversible coefficient c is obtained directly
from the initial slope of the normal magnetization curve
using (17). The values of a, a , and k are then obtained TABLE 111
by using (29), (36), and (40)successively in an iterative HYSTERESIS OBTAINED
PARAMETERS BY THE
INVERSIONALGORITHMFROM THE DATAGIVEN IN
procedure. A seed value of a is used, and from (20), a TABLE 11. THESE
CANBE COMPARED WITH THE
first estimate of a is found. Then k is calculated from (29). ORIGINAL GENERATING
DATAIN TABLE
I
Using the current values of k and a, Q is then calculated
A B
from (36), and then using the current values of a! and k ,
a is calculated from (40). The procedure for calculating M, (A . m-’) 1.7 x lo6 1.7 x lo6
k , a , and a is then repeated. a (A . m-I) 1015 1039
k (A . m-’) 490 1927
a 1.08 x 1 0 - ~ 1.13 x 1 0 - ~
SAMPLECALCULATION OF THE HYSTERESIS PARAMETERS c 0.102 0.104

Two model hysteresis loops were calculated using the

values of the parameters shown in Table I. From these
cyrves, the values of the various “fixed reference points” parameters can be rather sensitive to small changes in the
were obtained as shown in Table 11. These were then used measured magnetic properties.
as input data for the parameter calculation program. By
using a theoretical curve in this way, the correct values MODELINGOF EXPERIMENTAL HYSTERESIS LOOPS
of the hysteresis parameters were known in advance, and This section discusses the modeling of actual measured
the precision of the parameter calculation program could hysteresis loops using the theoretical equations. The ex-
be found from inversion. amples are of specimens of 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, and 1.0
The values of the parameters calculated from the in- wt% carbon steel, the magnetization curves of which are
version algorithm using the results obtained in Figs. 1 and shown in Figs. 5-9. From the magnetization curves, the
2 are shown in Table 111. From these, it can be seen that various “fixed reference points” were obtained and the
the errors encountered in the inversion process in a, k , a , hysteresis parameters were calculated using the inversion
and c are 1.5-3.9%, 2.0-3.7%, 8.0-13.0%, and 2.0- algorithm. The theoretical curves are also shown in Figs.
4.0%,respectively. It is felt that further improvements in 5-9, and these show excellent agreement with the exper-
the algorithm may be possible, such as a least squares imental results. For example, for the 1 wt% C steel, the
fitting procedure over the entire loop; however, most of measured coercivity was 1509 A m-’ (compared with
the errors encountered are now due to the precision with 1538 A m-’ using the model), the remanence was 0.72
which data can be obtained from the experimental hyster- X lo6 A m-’ (compared with 0.68 X lo6 A m-’), -
esis loops rather than in the algorithm since the model and the initial differential susceDtibilitv was 45 (comPared
JILES er a l . . H Y S T E R E S I S P A R A M E T E R S FOR M O D E L I N G M A G N E T I C PROPERTIES 33

B (Tesla) 2.0

t I
I
-45000 45000 -2

Measured (dashed line)

Modelled (solid line)
-2.0 -

Fig. 5 . Comparison of measured and modeled hysteresis curves of a spec- Fig. 8. Comparison of measured and modeled hysteresis curves for a spec-
imen of 1 .O wt% C carbon steel. imen of 0.4 wt % C steel.

B (Teslo) B (Tesla) 2.0

2.0 1

2 00
H ( A h )

Measured (dashed line)

Modelled (solid line)
-2.0 J

Fig. 6 . Comparison of measured and modeled hysteresis curves for a spec- Fig. 9. Comparison of measured and modeled hysteresis curves for a spec-
imen of 0.8 wt% C steel. imen of 0.2 wt% C steel.

E (Tesla) 2.0 E (Tesla) 0.5 7

7
-2 00 -400

H ( A h )

Measured (dashed line)

Modelled (solid line)
-2.0 J -0.5

Fig. 7 . Comparison of measured and modeled hysteresis curves fora spec- Fig. 10. Comparison of measured and modeled hysteresis curves for a
imen of 0.6 wt% C steel. specimen of 3C8 manganese-zinc ferrite.

with 41), which is a dimensionless quantity. A compari-
son of the observed and modeled results for this specimen
is given in Tables IV and V.
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The hysteresis loops of a wide range of magnetic ma-
terials can be modeled using the equations given above.
The hysteresis parameters were calculated from the var-
ious intercepts and slopes taken from experimental hys-
teresis loops. At present, it is still necessary to obtain
these parameters from a curve-fitting procedure, even
though a physical description of the effects of these var-
ious parameters has been given previously. It is desirable,
however, that these parameters be obtained, where pos-
34 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 28, NO. 1, JANUARY 1992

TABLE IV
MEASURED
MAGNETIC
PROPERTIES OF M A T E R I A L S SHOWN I N FIGS. 5-10

3C8
Fe Fe Fe Fe Fe Mn-Zn
1.0 wt% C 0.8 wt% C 0.6 wt% C 0.4 wt% C 0.2 wt% C Femte

Saturation induction 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.5

(tesla)
Initial anhysteretic 1000 1343 2000 2700 5000 6500
relative permeability
Initial relative 45 142 75 104 100 2700
permeability
Field at loop tip (A/m) 43 600 8883 17 000 16 000 17 200 240
Induction at loop tip 1.88 1.62 1.85 1.83 1.94 0.46
(tesla)
Bm Relative differential 6 5 I 5 5 190
permeability at loop
tip
Remanence (tesla) 0.72 0.81 1.1 0.91 0.88 0.10
Relative differential 213 508 650 1000 1200 4250
permeability at
remanence
Coercivity (A/m) 1509 693 620 400 315 16
Relative differential 750 1034 1520 1200 1520 6250
permeability at
coercive point

TABLE V
PARAMETERS M,,a , k, a,AND C AS OBTAINED FROM THE MEASURED
MODELHYSTERESIS HYSTERESIS
CURVES SHOWN IN FIGS.5-10

3C8
Fe Fe Fe Fe Fe Mn-Zn
1.0 wt% C 0.8 wt% C 0.6 wt% C 0.4 wt% C 0.2 wt% C Femte

M, 1.5 x IO6 1.6 x IO6 1.6 x IO6 1.6 x lo6 1.6 x IO6 0.4 x IO6
a 1800 1000 972 1010 1085 27
k 1800 700 672 455 320 30
a 1.4 x 1.4 x 1.4 x 1.8 x 2 x IO-' 5 x 10-~
c 0.14 0.22 0.14 0.21 0.3 0.55

B, 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.5

A. 461 1450 1987 4203 22 165 6512
pin 41 110 78 112 155 2686
H, 40000 9000 17 000 16 000 17 200 240
B, 1.87 1.6 1.82 1.81 1.91 0.44
P, 2.4 14.9 5.4 5.7 5.4 200
B, 0.68 0.71 0.85 0.86 0.91 0.10
pr 278 586 580 648 706.4 5064
H, 1538 617 624 44 1 337 15
B, 389 1206 1633 3236 5571 5718

The model parameters were first obtained from the parameter calculation algorithm by using the mea-
sured properties at the origin, loop tip, remanence, and coercivity. This gave a first approximation based
only on four points on the curve. The parameters were then optimized manually to obtain a better fit over
the entire range of the measured hysteresis loop.
Also shown in the table are the modeled magnetic properties (pin, pin,etc.) obtained by calculating the
hysteresis loop using the given model parameters (Ms, a , k, a,and c).

sible, from first principles. In particular, the parameter a,
which can be described as a form factor for the anhyster-
etic curve, presents a problem since, although it is clearly
temperature dependent, it does not seem to simply rep-
resent the Boltzmann energy kBT unless a regular array of
pseudodomains (domains of equal magnetic moment) is
assumed. It is affected by anisotropy and texture, result-
ing in different anhysteretic magnetization curves along
different directions in a textured material.
Although this goal of providing a more fundamental
interpretation of the hysteresis parameters is being pur-
sued, it must be remembered that the scaling up of micro-
scopic theories (e.g., a single domain wall/defect inter-
action) to account for macroscopic properties (e.g.,
magnetization curves) is a formidable problem which is
fraught with difficulties. Furthermore, it is unlikely that a
parameter such as k will be interpretable other than as a
statistical averaged of all the domain wall pinning mech-
anisms occurring in the material.
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
The objective of this paper is to show how the hyster-
esis parameters a, a, k, and c can be determined from
experimental hysteresis measurements, and then used to
JILES et al.: HYSTERESIS PARAMETERS FOR MODELING MAGNETIC PROPERTIES
model the hysteresis curves using the theory of hysteresis.
This represents a new development of the modeling of
ferromagnetic hysteresis which makes it possible for the
first time to calculate the generating parameters for this
model from a set of experimental data. It has been shown
that the method described is capable of determining the
values of these parameters to within an error of a few per-
cent. A comparison of measured and modeled hysteresis
loops has also been given which shows excellent agree-
ment between the modeled and measured curves.
In the future, two further contributions to hysteresis
need to be incorporated into the model. These are mag-
netocrystalline anisotropy and texture. Magnetocrystal-
line anisotropy will contribute to additional coercivity
which could be described by anisotropic rotation models
such as that of Stoner and Wohlfarth [8]. It may therefore
be anticipated that the magnetocrystalline anisotropy will
emerge as an independent contribution to the parameter k
in the present model. Texture (preferred orientation) in
the presence of magnetocrystalline anisotropy will lead to
preferred axes of magnetization within the bulk specimen.
This should emerge as changes in the anhysteretic mag-
netization curve Man(H),which will then assume an an-
gular dependence, as described by Furlani and Baker [ 5 ] .
The net result will be differences in the differential sus-
ceptibility x ’ of the model along particular directions of
the specimen, as observed in practice.
Finally, it is felt that although the two differential equa-
tions of hysteresis (6) and (8) represent the underlying
mechanism of hysteresis, the choice of a function for the
anhysteretic magnetization Man must depend on the details
of the particular material chosen (e.g., whether texture is
present). So far, a phenomenological model using the
modified Langevin equation (18) has been used since this
has worked satisfactorily in a large number of cases. It is,
however, applicable only to isotropic media, but gives
good results for soft magnetic materials such as iron and
steel. It should not be thought of as totally general, and
35
consequently, an appropriate function for Manshould he
chosen for each particular material.
REFERENCES
[I] D. C. Jiles and D. L. Atherton, J . Appl. Phys., vol. 5 5 , p. 21 15, 1984.
[2] -, J . Phys. D,vol. 17, p. 1265, 1984.
[3] -,J. Magnetism Magn. Mater., vol. 61, p. 48, 1986.
141 J. A. Szpunar and B. Szpunar, J . Appl. Phys., vol. 57, p. 4232, 1985.
[5] E. P. Furlani and A . G . Baker, J . A p p f . Phys., vol. 59, p. 3815, 1986.
[6] P. Garikepati, T. T. Chang, and D. C. Jiles, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol.
24, p. 2922, 1988.
[7] D. C. Jiles and J. B. Thoelke, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 25, p. 3928,
1989.
181 E. C. Stoner and E. P. Wohlfarth, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. (London),
vol. A240, p. 599, 1948.
David C. Jiles (M’83-SM’89) received the Ph.D. degree in applied phys-
ics from the University of Hull, Hull, England, in 1979, and studied at
Victoria University, New Zealand, and Queen’s University, Canada.
He joined the Ames Laboratory, Iowa State University, in 1984 and the
Center for NDE in 1986. He is currently a Senior Physicist with Iowa State
University’s Institute for Physical Research and Technology and Professor
of Materials Science and Engineering. He is the author of over 100 scien-
tific and technical papers, and the author of the book, Introduction 10 Mug-
nerism and Magnetic Materials (1990).
Dr. Jiles is a Fellow of the Institute of Physics and a member of the
American Society for Materials, the Metallurgical Society, and the Amer-
ican Society for Nondestructive Testing. He is a Registered Professional
Engineer, serves as a consultant for several companies both in North Amer-
ica and Europe, and was awarded a higher doctorate in physics in 1990 by
the University of Birmingham for his work on the magnetic and electronic
properties of metals.
J. B. Thoelke, biography not available at the time of publication.
M. K. Devine, received the B.S. degree in metallurgical engineering from
the Illinois Institute of Technology in 1989. He is presently working to-
wards the M . S . degree in material science and engineering at Iowa State
University, Ames.